It is a really silly argument to use a word that does not exist and because the word does not exist in the English language, the term used to signify no longer alive does not exist. The term is "die." The born can die. That which is born can die. This what happens to the faith of a child of God who walks away, shipwreaks his faith, falls away, any number of Biblical terms for the man who is no longer a child of God.Johns 1:12, "But, as many as received Him, to them gave He the power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on His name."
John 3:3, "Jesus answered and said unto him, verily, verily, I say unto thee, except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God."
Hebrews 12:6, "For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom He receiveth."
When a lost person is "saved" he/she is "born again" into the family of God, and therefore is a child of God.
I have 2 grown children. When they were young children, living in my home, I would discipline them whenever they were disobedient or did something wrong, and they were still my child. If one or both of them decide to denounce me as his or her parent, he or she would still be my child. Neither one could ever become unborn as my child.
God is greater then we are.
Think about it.
Regards,
John
It is a really silly argument to use a word that does not exist and because the word does not exist in the English language, the term used to signify no longer alive does not exist. The term is "die." The born can die. That which is born can die. This what happens to the faith of a child of God who walks away, shipwreaks his faith, falls away, any number of Biblical terms for the man who is no longer a child of God.
What is more, Jesus used the term "sons of the Devil." Since these ones are children of the Devil, I guess they can never be anything but children of the Devil, right? If the word "son of God" means you can never be not a son of God, then "son of the Devil" means you can never not be a son of the Devil. Bummer!!
It is a really silly argument to use a word that does not exist and because the word does not exist in the English language, the term used to signify no longer alive does not exist.
This what happens to the faith of a child of God who walks away, shipwreaks his faith, falls away, any number of Biblical terms for the man who is no longer a child of God.
What is more, Jesus used the term "sons of the Devil." Since these ones are children of the Devil, I guess they can never be anything but children of the Devil, right? If the word "son of God" means you can never be not a son of God, then "son of the Devil" means you can never not be a son of the Devil. Bummer!!
I have discussed this theology at length with those who believe it and the answers are all the same so I will not discuss it with you. But I have given those who do not stand under that umbrella of theology an answer to the use of the term "unborn" which is defending the position with semantics using a word that does not exist to prove that a state of being does not exist. It shows that the position is very weak and one has to make up a word to demonstrate the theology. I hope you never use the argument that since no one can be "unborn" therefore those born again cannot be unborn. THe term is "die." Those born can die.Yes, the bible is clear, that which is born can & will, die. But, the bible is also clear that everyone who is born again will never die.
If you had a child who died, then is that child unborn, and therefore not your child? Of course not. If your child walks away from you and declares that he/she no longer is your child does that mean that you child is unborn to you, therefore no longer your child? Of course not. Your child will always be your child regardless of his/her decisions to the contrary.
A true child of God will always be a child of God. If a child of God shipwrecks their faith, they do not lose their position as a child of God. 1Corinthians 5:5 refers to a professing Christian who was living an immoral life, and Paul says "you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord." Sounds like the man's faith was shipwrecked, consequently he suffered for his sins, but he did not lose his salvation. The bible says that anyone who believes in Jesus, believes the Gospel message, has everlasting life. What IS everlasting life? Well it sounds like it is everlasting, and if someone could walk away from everlasting life then he never had it.
I must disagree with the assumption that a son of the devil can never not be a son of the devil.
John 8:12-47, Jesus is talking to the scribes & Pharisees, and they are saying that Jesus is not from above; not from God as He claims to be. Jesus tells them that if they do not believe He is from above, from the Father, that they will die in their sins. As He is talking to them some believed in Him.
Down in verse 44 Jesus calls them sons of their father the devil, so here we have some, who Jesus has called sons of the devil, who believed in Him. Those who believe in Jesus are born again, so these sons of the devil become a child of God.
Regards,
John
The word does not exist and so the state does not exist. The word to describe the state of "unborn" is died or die. A man can die. A faith can die. This playing with making up words that do not exist and say therefore the faith cannot undergo that word that does not exsit in the language is really a very weak argument and mere semantics. SHows me that the position is theologically weak if one has to resort to making up non-existance words.The idea of being un-born is intended to convey an impossibility. Once one is born, one cannot be unborn. Yes, one can die but one cannot return to the state prior to one's birth. In the same way, once born spiritually, it is impossible to return to the state one was in prior to one's spiritual birth.
Again, I know all the arguments from the OSAS crowd. They are all cookie-cutter the same so I know none of those who hold this position ever thought about it but simply learned the arguments from men and swallowed them hook, line and sinker. There is no point in discussing this because it has a deeply emotional hold on those who believe it. I can see why. They think their whole eternity in Heaven stands on that theology being true so they defend it to the teeth and they line out every verse that challenges that emotionally held theology. So I leave you to your position as I know nothing could convince you otherwise.The man who walks away from the faith demonstrates in doing so, not that he had been saved and lost his salvation, but that he had never been saved. The apostle John made this point in his first letter. (1 John 2:19)
When a genuinely born-again man "falls away," it is from fellowship with God, not from his relationship to God as God's child. See the story of the Prodigal Son.
This is what is known as a non sequitur. The conclusion you've arrived at doesn't follow from the premises you've offered. Are "sons of the devil" sons of his in the way "sons of God" are God's sons? No. The devil does not redeem and adopt those under his power. They are in no way "children" to him in the sense in which Christians are children of God. The devil makes none of the promises to his "children" that God does to His own - promises to never leave them nor forsake them (Hebrews 13:5); promises to allow no man to pluck His children from His hand (John 10:28-29); promises to love them faithfully for Christ's sake. (1 Corinthians 1:9; Ephesians 1:7; 1 Corinthians 1:30) The devil seeks only the destruction of his "children." Clearly, then, the devil does not establish a relationship with those under his power that is anything like the relationship God forms with those who place their trust in Christ. And so, it is entirely false to draw the parallel you have above.
The word does not exist and so the state does not exist.
The word to describe the state of "unborn" is died or die.
A man can die. A faith can die
This playing with making up words that do not exist and say therefore the faith cannot undergo that word that does not exsit in the language is really a very weak argument and mere semantics. SHows me that the position is theologically weak if one has to resort to making up non-existance words.
Again, I know all the arguments from the OSAS crowd.
They are all cookie-cutter the same so I know none of those who hold this position ever thought about it but simply learned the arguments from men and swallowed them hook, line and sinker.
There is no point in discussing this because it has a deeply emotional hold on those who believe it. I can see why. They think their whole eternity in Heaven stands on that theology being true so they defend it to the teeth
The word does not exist and so the state does not exist. The word to describe the state of "unborn" is died or die. A man can die. A faith can die. This playing with making up words that do not exist and say therefore the faith cannot undergo that word that does not exsit in the language is really a very weak argument and mere semantics. SHows me that the position is theologically weak if one has to resort to making up non-existance words.
Again, I know all the arguments from the OSAS crowd. They are all cookie-cutter the same so I know none of those who hold this position ever thought about it but simply learned the arguments from men and swallowed them hook, line and sinker. There is no point in discussing this because it has a deeply emotional hold on those who believe it. I can see why. They think their whole eternity in Heaven stands on that theology being true so they defend it to the teeth and they line out every verse that challenges that emotionally held theology. So I leave you to your position as I know nothing could convince you otherwise.
No atheist can be unborn. You take a term that means BEFORE birth and use it to mean something totally different. “Born again” is a metaphor. You cannot honestly apply all the facts of the birthing of humans to a metaphor. The word as you use it doesn’t exist.The word does exist. If it didn't, we wouldn't be talking about it. And every child still in the womb is an unborn child. So, the unborn state exists, too. What doesn't exist, what isn't possible, is a return to an unborn state.
The state of being that is irreversible cannot be applied to human choice.Why? Says who? Before a baby is conceived, is it dead? Before a child in the womb is born is it dead? No. Dying is actually a natural and unavoidable part of life.
The body dies. The man inside doesn’t. The man inside can change his mind....about being married, being a christian, being honest, a great many matters. You should realize that the limits applied to a physical body are not applied to choice. If you want the terms Jesus used it’s falling away from the faith. He said it happens so take care.Every man WILL die. Does every faith die, too, then? Your parallel has some serious flaws...
Not at all. Your position has made you blind to the progress of physical life from which there no return (unborn-born-baby-child-youth-adult-older adult-death.) You have to think that because there’s no going back in this, there’s no going back on a CHOICE.So far, semantical tactics and weak arguments appear to exist only on your end.
I understand it better than you. You can only repeat the same arguments ts you learned. Nothing original.So? Do you understand them? Doesn't seem like it.
Wow. Here's another giant non sequitur. And also an ad hominem argument.
I didn't think you understood the OSAS view and this proves it.
Where is 4) the state no believer in Christ can ever enter again?From Merriam-Webster Dictionary- Definition of unborn:
1 :not born
2 :still to appear
3 :existing without birth
Doesn't look like a non-existent word does it?
Regards,
John
No atheist can be unborn. You take a term that means BEFORE birth and use it to mean something totally different. “Born again” is a metaphor. You cannot honestly apply all the facts of the birthing of humans to a metaphor. The word as you use it doesn’t exist.
The state of being that is irreversible cannot be applied to human choice.
The body dies. The man inside doesn’t. The man inside can change his mind....about being married, being a christian, being honest, a great many matters.
If you want the terms Jesus used it’s falling away from the faith. He said it happens so take care.
I understand it better than you. You can only repeat the same arguments ts you learned. Nothing original.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?